I disagree Dave. If you were to count the many hundreds if not thousands of
hours which have been wasted arguing over the thermometry, multiplied by the
hourly rate of the arguers, the actual cost to do excellent water flow
calorimetry would have been a small fraction of that – probably less than 10%.
Ahern offered to do this for less than the many airfares to Lugano. Levi should
not be given a free ride on this report, since he was roundly criticized in the
first instance. I suspect he was well-paid as well.
From: David Roberson
Jones, you are being unfair to Levi and the others. Putting together a
calorimetric system that the skeptics would accept as accurate would not be an
easy task.
I appreciate the work that these guys performed. There are shortcomings that
many have pointed out, but I suspect that this will always be the situation
regardless of what is done.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene
The discussion of color and temperature only mask the glaring reality that
an inexpensive way to be certain of thermal gain in the TP2 device is flow
calorimetry.
Of course, Levi knew that from TP1 – he was told this by dozens of peers -
that he should have performed this task, yet he did not. There is no valid
excuse … other than gross incompetence.
The spiel that the temperature of the tube must maintain thermal equilibrium
is no excuse. A long copper sheet, bent into a jacket with surrounding water
coil extending over the lead-tubes, and surrounded by Aerogel super
insulation could be mounted 20 cm away so as not to affect thermal
equilibrium. It would retain 95% of heat (all forms) to be removed by the
fluid.
Instead, we are left with a credibility disaster for LENR in general. Can
Mizuno right the ship?
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene
There is one other important detail in the discussion of
light vs. temperature – the coherence or semi-coherence of the radiation.
This is a step above “intensity”.
If it is semi-coherent, the term “superradiance” is used.
Even “invisible” IR light can be extremely visible – blindingly visible,
when it is coherent or semi-coherent.
A CO2 laser is all the evidence you need of that. The IR
photons of this laser are completely invisible to the human eye - unless
coherent where they show up as red.
The CO2 laser is important because this wavelength is near
or identical to where NASA thinks SPP are most easily formed. Of course,
that could be because they are using a CO2 laser :-)
From: H Veeder
_Colour temperature_ refers to the *peak*
emission of a blackbody whose temperature produces a peak emission within
the visible spectrum.
e.g. The surface of the sun is about 6000C
and the peek emission is white light so it has color temperature of white.
_Incadescence_ is the *visible* light
emitted by a black body at a given temperature.
An iron at 800C glows red but the peak
emission is in the infrared .
